SakuraX222 Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 the difierence for the gamer, is, only when it uses all them cores, other wise, no. anyway a quad-core CPU is useless right now. P.S. i know my stuff, mind you, i'm a proffesional with PC hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duskrider Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 the difierence for the gamer, is, only when it uses all them cores, other wise, no. Wow, reviving a thread from a year ago just to repeat the obvious that has already been stated... anyway a quad-core CPU is useless right now. This is completely wrong. I'm running a quad 2.4 ghz chip right now, and it is very useful. Of course I do a lot of 3d rendering work, with programs optimized for using as many cores as you can give them (even on multiple computers over a network). I currently run at 99% CPU use on all four cores, giving pretty much half the render time compared to an equivalent dual core CPU. I'd say it was worth the extra money. So it really all depends. Some people will benefit massively from a quad-core CPU, some people would be better off saving their money for something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Wolfe Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Well, as long as this topic has been ressurected, let me tell you all that intel has recently comm out with it's latest in the quadcore CPU division:Intel® Core™2 Extreme Processor QX9775As you can see in The Chart It is ridiculously powerful, but its pin count is 771 making it compatible only with the Intel® Desktop Board DX5400 supporting a dual-socket configuration. If Intel continues this new trend, will it hurt CPU sale or boost motherboard sales? Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duskrider Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Well, as long as this topic has been ressurected, let me tell you all that intel has recently comm out with it's latest in the quadcore CPU division:Intel® Core™2 Extreme Processor QX9775As you can see in The Chart It is ridiculously powerful, but its pin count is 771 making it compatible only with the Intel® Desktop Board DX5400 supporting a dual-socket configuration. If Intel continues this new trend, will it hurt CPU sale or boost motherboard sales? Discuss. The real problem with this new "Core 200000 Awesome Uber Pwnage Edition" or whatever marketing name they want to give it is it's so far past the point of diminishing returns that it's absolutely stupid to buy it. Even the stuff that's optimized for multi-core systems isn't worth it. Sure, you'll get all of the theoretical speed increase with something like 3d rendering, but you'll get even more power if you spend that extra money on buying two slightly slower computers. And for gaming and stuff, it's completely redundant, you'll hit choke points on your other system components long before you use up all of that processor power. So since the only real benefit at the moment is making pretty benchmark graphs, I don't think it'll have much effect on CPU or motherboard sales. Once the prices come down to sane levels, it won't really make any difference if you need to buy a new motherboard, they aren't all that expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramul Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Out of curiosity, do modern(ish) operating systems automatically distribute separate processes between cores? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagrant0 Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Out of curiosity, do modern(ish) operating systems automatically distribute separate processes between cores?In most cases yes, although it's limited to what software you're running to decide if a task is limited primarily to a single core, or if both cores try to work on that task. Most of the newer software that can acually max out your processor can utilize both cores for a single task, however you do occasionally find one that will just stick to a single core no matter how much that program may be trying to do. However this is limited more to older software and those few programs that were made by people without a budget or the technical knowhow to make them work. Even then, the OS will still usually force other tasks to the other core. Rest assured, Oblivion does seem to use both cores. But you'll usually run into bottleneck with other hardware before maxing out your processor... Which is a good thing considdering how poorly Oblivion manages slow processing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joededman Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 What happend to triple core? :P A triple core is just a quad core that passed Quality Assurance tests on only three out of four cores. It allows the manufacturer to sell them anyway and get some money out of the situation. Apparently there is a pretty high defect ratio when they start to build chips with a lot of circuits at 65nm. joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkWarrior45 Posted March 29, 2008 Share Posted March 29, 2008 What happend to triple core? :P A triple core is just a quad core that passed Quality Assurance tests on only three out of four cores. It allows the manufacturer to sell them anyway and get some money out of the situation. Apparently there is a pretty high defect ratio when they start to build chips with a lot of circuits at 65nm. joe AMD has a true triple coming out, hopefully. And from I hear it is suppose to be a better CPU in light of their lastest track record. The only thing is, it's a 65nm chip like all the other Phenoms. Which put all of AMD's CPU's behind Intel's in regards to heating and power usage. Me personally, I would go with a cpu that can handle a good graphics card, such as Intel's new Wolfdale Dual core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.